| 1 |
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 10:15:22AM +0200, foser wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 12:33 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 3 |
> > you'd |
| 4 |
> > know that scattered KEYWORDS is a pita to deal with ... i've seen cases where |
| 5 |
> > a specific arch was duplicated in KEYWORDS; once near the beginning and once |
| 6 |
> > near the end ... normally it wasnt anything bad, but there was a case where |
| 7 |
> > one KEYWORD was stable while the other was unstable |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Again something I'd only expect to happen in cases where someone is |
| 10 |
> reordering keywords at will inside a package. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> A certain amount of uncertainty in order actually might prove to be |
| 13 |
> effective in having everyone who deals with keywords actually really |
| 14 |
> check all keywords and not depend on assumptions, which both 'error' |
| 15 |
> cases you mention seem to be caused by. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
Sorry foser but there's just no way that making it *harder* to find |
| 18 |
keywords in ebuilds is going to cause less mistakes. Alphabetical |
| 19 |
keyword ordering is a big help for arch maintainers and as such has my |
| 20 |
full support. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
And in those cases where I'm in doubt whether the package maintainer |
| 23 |
thinks some version is stable I'd rather ask the maintainer than rely on |
| 24 |
some arbitrary keyword ordering which doesn't mean much anyway as |
| 25 |
maintainers change archs all the time. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Regards, |
| 28 |
Bryan Østergaard |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives